By Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel is divided on Bitcoin's near-term prospects, with some arguing that sovereign adoption could drive a new demand shock, while others caution about diminishing returns, regulatory risks, and macro headwinds.
Risk: Regulatory risks and the potential for sovereign adoption to stall or not materialize by 2026.
Opportunity: Potential demand shock from sovereign adoption, particularly if a G7 nation formalizes a strategic reserve.
This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →
On the surface, Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) might look like the type of digital asset you wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole. After all, it's now down 50% from its all-time high last October, and trades for just $64,000. Billionaire investor Jeremy Grantham recently warned that Bitcoin will now "dwindle away" with a whimper.
But, if history is any guide, Bitcoin could be a great bargain right now. Here's why.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now, when you join Stock Advisor. See the stocks »
The first thing you need to know about Bitcoin is that it typically trades in four-year cycles of boom and bust. So the current downturn in the price of Bitcoin is nothing new. Crypto investors have seen this story before: Bitcoin has three fantastic years, and then crashes in value. A new cycle then begins.
Perhaps this is just a historical coincidence, and can be safely ignored. But Bitcoin does undergo a much-ballyhooed halving event every four years, and this is generally cited as the reason the four-year cycle persists.
Just think back to the last Bitcoin bear market. After hitting a (then) all-time high of $69,000 in November 2021, Bitcoin crashed in value by 64% in 2022. However, it recovered quickly. In 2023 and 2024, Bitcoin posted triple-digit returns. And, in the first 10 months of 2025, Bitcoin cruised to a new all-time high of $126,000.
So, in hindsight, Bitcoin was arguably "due" for a correction. Remember: three good years, then one bad year. If history repeats itself, this one bad year should eventually lead to a recovery.
That means, after 10 months of atrocious performance, Bitcoin may already be in recovery mode. And, in fact, several high-profile crypto investors -- including Cathie Wood of Ark Invest and Brian Armstrong of Coinbase Global (NASDAQ: COIN) -- have already called a bottom for Bitcoin.
But wait, it gets better. That's because every Bitcoin bear market appears to be getting shallower over time. On July 28, Bitcoin Magazine posted a stunning graphic on social media showing that, from peak to trough, the drawdowns are getting shallower over time.
In 2011, for example, the drawdown was 94%. In 2013, the drawdown was 86%. In 2017, the drawdown was 84%. In 2022, the drawdown was 78%. Thus far in 2026, the drawdown has been 54%.
It's up to you to decide whether Bitcoin is in recovery mode. But the historical evidence should convince most skeptics that Bitcoin will resume its long-term march higher at some point.
For much of its existence, Bitcoin has been one of the top-performing assets in the world. Thus, buying this asset at an extraordinary 50% discount could be a unique buying opportunity. While past performance is no guarantee of future performance, I'm convinced that Bitcoin is an unbelievable bargain right now.
Before you buy stock in Bitcoin, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Bitcoin wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $386,727! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,232,139!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 906% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 208% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.
**Stock Advisor returns as of August 1, 2026. *
Dominic Basulto has positions in Bitcoin. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin. The Motley Fool recommends Coinbase Global. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"Diminishing cycle returns plus already-embedded institutional demand mean the statistical 'bargain' is largely illusory at current levels."
The article pushes the classic four-year halving cycle narrative and shallower drawdowns (94% → 54%) to argue BTC at $64k is a 50% discount bargain. Yet it cherry-picks history while ignoring that each cycle has seen progressively lower returns: 2013 +5,000%, 2017 +1,900%, 2021 +600%. With spot ETFs, nation-state adoption, and corporate treasuries already priced in, marginal buyers may be scarcer. Cathie Wood and Coinbase have skin in the game; their 'bottom is in' calls are not independent evidence. Current 10-month drawdown of ~50% from $126k (article's 2025 peak) already matches the 'shallower' pattern, so the upside asymmetry the piece touts is smaller than in prior cycles.
If institutional adoption continues and the next halving supply shock meets sustained ETF and sovereign demand, the cycle could re-accelerate and push BTC toward $150k+ within 18 months, rendering the valuation concerns academic.
"Bitcoin's historical cycle is losing predictive power as its price action becomes increasingly tethered to global liquidity and real interest rates rather than internal halving mechanics."
The article relies on a 'four-year cycle' heuristic that is increasingly fragile as Bitcoin matures into a macro-correlated asset. While the halving provides a supply-side narrative, the 'shallower drawdowns' argument ignores the massive liquidity shifts driven by central bank policy and institutional adoption. We are no longer in the retail-driven 'wild west' era; Bitcoin now trades in lockstep with liquidity-sensitive assets like the Nasdaq-100. Relying on historical cycles while ignoring the current high-interest-rate environment and the resulting opportunity cost of capital is dangerous. If the Fed maintains a 'higher for longer' stance, the 'bargain' narrative collapses under the weight of real-yield competition.
The institutionalization of Bitcoin via ETFs has fundamentally altered the supply-demand dynamic, potentially rendering historical volatility patterns obsolete and creating a permanent floor that previous cycles lacked.
"Shallowing drawdowns prove market maturation, not inevitable recovery—and the article provides no evidence that the halving cycle will override structural headwinds like regulatory tightening and adoption saturation."
The article conflates correlation with causation. Yes, Bitcoin drawdowns are shallowing (94% → 54%), but this could reflect market maturation and larger capital bases dampening volatility—not a guarantee of recovery. The 'four-year cycle' is cherry-picked pattern recognition; Bitcoin has only ~15 years of data, making statistical claims premature. More critically: the article ignores that halving events are priced in months ahead, and regulatory risk (SEC enforcement, stablecoin crackdowns) has intensified since 2021. The $64k price reflects real uncertainty, not irrational pessimism. Grantham's skepticism deserves weight—he's flagging adoption plateau risk that cyclical analysis misses.
If the cycle holds and capital flows into crypto accelerate post-election, Bitcoin could genuinely re-rate to $150k+ within 18 months, making current levels a legitimate entry point for long-term holders.
"Bitcoin’s bargain thesis depends on a repeating cycle; the real test is whether macro policy, regulation, and CBDC competition won’t derail that cycle and prevent a durable upside."
Headline view is bullish: BTC is portrayed as an 'unbelievable bargain' after a 50% drawdown, bolstered by a four-year boom/bust cycle and diminishing bear declines. But this rests on backward-looking history and selective data. The strongest caveat is regime risk: higher-for-longer rates, evolving crypto regulation, tax treatment, and the looming competition from central bank digital currencies could extend bear periods or suppress upside. The article cherry-picks drawdown depth and halving effects while glossing miner economics, energy concerns, and liquidity dynamics. Even if cycles recur, a sustained rally requires durable demand and favorable policy amid a potentially risk-off macro environment.
Regulatory and macro shifts could break the cycle; even if cycles exist, there’s no guarantee the next ‘recovery’ prints new all-time highs or that institutional demand materializes as assumed.
"Sovereign demand shock could eclipse historical cycle dynamics and render diminishing returns academic."
Grok's diminishing returns thesis is sound, but the panel collectively underweights second-order liquidity effects: ETF inflows now dwarf mining issuance, yet sovereign adoption (e.g. potential U.S. strategic reserve) could create a demand shock larger than any prior cycle. This isn't priced in. Halving narratives are stale; the real asymmetry sits in nation-state balance-sheet allocation.
"Sovereign adoption transforms Bitcoin from a cyclical risk asset into an inelastic geopolitical reserve, breaking historical return patterns."
Grok's focus on sovereign adoption is the only real 'alpha' here. While Gemini and Claude fixate on macro correlation and retail maturation, they miss the game-theoretic shift: Bitcoin is moving from a speculative asset to a geopolitical hedge. If a G7 nation formalizes a strategic reserve, the 'diminishing returns' thesis breaks because the demand curve shifts from marginal retail buyers to inelastic state balance sheets. This isn't about cycles; it's about reserve currency competition.
"Sovereign reserve adoption is a tail-risk catalyst, not a pricing assumption—conflating it with cycle analysis obscures the base case of institutional saturation."
Gemini and Grok conflate two separate theses: geopolitical reserve demand and cycle dynamics. Sovereign adoption *would* break diminishing returns—but it's speculative. The U.S. strategic reserve narrative has zero legislative traction; El Salvador's adoption hasn't catalyzed G7 mimicry. Betting $64k on a policy regime shift that hasn't materialized is different from betting on cycle continuation. If sovereign demand doesn't arrive by 2026, we're left with institutional saturation and macro headwinds. That's the real downside nobody quantified.
"Sovereign demand could create upside, but its realization is uncertain and timing/scale will determine whether any rally is durable or episodic."
Responding to Grok: sovereign balance-sheet demand could be a real asymmetry, but the trigger is political and regulatory; if a G7 reserve narrative stalls, the anticipated bid is not durable. Even with that thesis, price impact would likely be episodic and offset by policy shifts, ETF flows, and mining dynamics. The risk is a mispricing of the timing and scale of sovereign purchases; a daily move to 150k remains speculative.
The panel is divided on Bitcoin's near-term prospects, with some arguing that sovereign adoption could drive a new demand shock, while others caution about diminishing returns, regulatory risks, and macro headwinds.
Potential demand shock from sovereign adoption, particularly if a G7 nation formalizes a strategic reserve.
Regulatory risks and the potential for sovereign adoption to stall or not materialize by 2026.